Friday, April 16, 2010

Yup, what Jane Blackmore said was credible enough, to put Elissa back on the hotseat:

The Salt Lake Tribune - "Roger Hoole, Wall's attorney, said the development was a 'concern' and that he felt it would be appropriate to remand the case back to the trial court.

He said Wall was voluntarily being interviewed by the A.G.'s Office on Thursday.'If Elissa was involved at all, it was unwittingly,' Hoole said. 'This is very unfortunate and we're very concerned about it.'

He said the development didn't change the fact that she had been forced into an unwanted marriage and had nonconsensual sex.

(Michael) Piccarreta said (Warren) Jeffs' attorneys had just received the A.G.'s filing and were still reviewing it, but were 'pleased' that a witness had the integrity to come forward with the information, which he said 'undermines the integrity of the trial.'

'It also suggests that there is a long-term, ongoing attempt to obstruct justice or cover up this fact and people who are involved in this have to make a decision whether they will come forward and tell the truth,' he said. 'I would expect law enforcement would take into account people who have come forward and told the trust, but on the other hand there should be harsh consequences for those who continue with the cover up.'

Piccarreta said that 'generally witnesses who are involved in that behavior are not to be trusted in other aspects of their testimony.'

During the trial, (Jane) Blackmore testified under oath that documents introduced as Exhibit 43 were the original records of Wall's visits to her Canadian clinic for medical treatment."

This story, which I had been informed a week ago was "out there," probably broke with a tip originating in the Utah AG's office or with Roger Hoole, who we now know was having his client rather hastily "re-interviewed" by the AG's office while he was "unavailable for comment" earlier yesterday afternoon. Your Modern Pharisee pointed to idea that an INcredible witness in one area of sworn testimony tends to be regarded as an UNbelievable one in other areas. Hoole is scrambling to salvage his client's credibility or else the conviction fails. He's also trying to keep his client out of jail.

UPDATE - I was on the way out the door to work this morning, so I hadn't had time to fully round out my thoughts. From outward appearances, the prosecution of Allen Steed is dead. Elissa will be ripped to shreds on the stand whether she lied or not in testimony at the Warren Jeffs trial. Why? Let's downshift into Warren's conviction.

Warren should be able to lever this development into freedom (with regard to Utah) as well. Even if it is shown that Elissa did not consciously misrepresent facts, she can now be shown not to be able to remember them well enough to amount to a hill of beans. Warren should be given a new trial, and the developments this week will be used as a hammer against any testimony that is based on her distant past recollections.

Hasn't this always been the problem with old crimes based on witness testimony? People who in psychoanalysis suddenly "remember" a murder or a rape? Exhibit 43 is now for legal purposes, a fiction. The whole timeline is subject to question and it appears that Elissa's memory of it, bolstered by forged documents can't be relied on either. Why then would we rely on her knowing when her "rape" occurred? Even assuming that the rape did occur as she described it, she doesn't really have any idea when it happened.

Under the above scenario, Warren is granted a new trial, and the charges will be dropped.